Thanks for the input, Ron. It seems that there are still quite a few
unresolved issues
surrounding both SLSA and ELSA (at least in my feeble mind 8-)......

For some examples:

Suppose that the owner of an SLSA wanted to install a simple autopilot. It
seems
that this would require the explicit approval of the manufacturer (sort of a
"virtual
STC"), and would also need to be installed and signed off by an A&P. Yet it
appears that no additional equipment certification is required. So the
questions then
become: What types of equipment can or cannot be installed in an SLSA
without the
manufacturer's approval? Only items which are TSO'd? Is there going to be
an
additional STC approval process? Same rules as for Part 23?

Suppose an owner of an ELSA wanted to do the same thing. Do the same rules
apply as those for Experimental - Amateur Built or will there be a more
restrictive
set of rules applicable only to ELSAs?

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...
SLSAs (Special LSA, the production aircraft) must be maintained in strict
accordance to the manufacturer's instructions, including performing only
those
modifications that the manufacturer approves and making all changes the
manufacturer later specifies.

Exactly. But within what limits? (e.g. non-TSO panel mount GPS is okay but
Acme-brand wing leveler is not?).

However, if an owner does not WISH to maintain his aircraft to the
manufacturer's requirements, the owner can change the aircraft to
Experimental
LSA. I haven't got a good read, yet, on what limitations for changes (if
any)
are placed on ELSA-category aircraft. You obviously don't have to conform
to
the consensus standard, but I'm not sure if "anything goes" or not.

Do you suspect (as I do) that this is going to be a real can of worms? Is
it
reasonable to allow an owner to do virtually anything he wants after
purchasing
a "99% kit"? Probably not... I can imagine that until this is clarified
there are going
to be some really disappointed folks who see the "Experimental" tag and then
assume that they're getting the same privileges associated with "Amateur
Built"
without having to do any real building.

The Experimental/Amateur-Built category requires that the *construction*
be
undertaken for recreation or education. It does not require that the
plane be
operated solely for recreation or education...other than the limitation
against
commercial operation.

But if registered to a *company* - and I then hire a commercial pilot to
operate
it while I'm twiddling knobs, flipping switches and juggling test
equipment - certainly
that would be considered "commercial operation" would it not?

So you can't hire someone to build an Experimental/Amateur-Built RV-7A for
your
company to use as a test bed. But you can put down the money and buy a
used
one, and use *it* for your test bed. In that case, you'd just need an A&P
mechanic to perform the annual condition inspection...which would include
whether your experimental hardware are safe for flight.

Same problem as above? And an additional problem in that the original owner
would be required to make any major modifications?

You can buy a Cessna 172 and put it into the Experimental/Research and
Development category. It's more paperwork-intensive (the airworthiness
certificate will have to be renewed every year, and only required crews
are
allowed onboard) but if you're going for the certificated-aircraft market
(as
opposed to marketing strictly to homebuilts) you'll have to take this step
at
some point, anyway.

It's starting to look like this may be my *only* legal option. Unless, of
course, I
build something as an individual, do all testing, etc. as an individual, and
then transfer
or license the end result somehow to the company entity.

Hmmmmm..... May be time to try out some of the EAA troubleshooters in their
legal department...8-)......

Ron Wanttaja

Sounds like you'll have no shortage of material for some future articles,
Ron! 8-)
Thanks again,

Bill